Tony Blair demands Western intervention to overthrow Assad By Damien McElroy and agencies The consequences of refusing to intervene are likely to be more costly for the West than participating in the drive to oust the regime.

Speaking in Israel, the former prime minister acknowledged the “predominant emotion” in the West was to stay out of Syria, where rebels are battling to oust Bashar Assad and his regime, and avoid becoming embroiled in the politics of the region. “Undoubtedly the predominant emotion in the West today is to stay out of Syria; indeed to stay out of the region’s politics,” he said. “But as every day that passes shows, the cost of staying out may be paid in a higher price later.”

The comments came a day after G8 leaders papered over differences between the West and Russia to agree that a political solution to the conflict must be an international priority.

The Syrian National Coalition, the main opposition front body, said it was committed to participation in negotiations that sought to establish a transistional government.

“The Syrian National Coalition is committed to any political solution that puts an end to the [...]]]>

Can David Cameron explain why he has put us on al-Qaeda’s side? By Peter Oborne

The longer a prime minister remains in 10 Downing Street, the more likely he or she is to go mad. Something of the sort happened to Gordon Brown and also, from 2003 onwards if not before, to Tony Blair. No prime minister has left office in full possession of his or her mental faculties since Jim Callaghan in early 1979.

One of David Cameron’s admirable qualities has been his sanity. He is unexcitable. He is not paranoid, does not conspire against his colleagues, sit up to the small hours of the morning brooding, or hurl pieces of crockery around the room when in a violent rage. He is not subject to sudden, irrational mood-swings.

None of this can or should be taken for granted, and surely Samantha Cameron can take some of the credit. “My job is to get him out of here sane,” she tells friends.

But the Prime Minister has been in the job for three years (and Tory leader for nearly eight), and watching him answer questions on the floor of the House on [...]]]>

The who-knew-what about the real costs of the F-35 fighter jet Canada wants to purchase is worrisome enough. But at the heart of the fiasco is a far more serious concern about what public honesty means to this government.

It’s a sad state that few Canadians appear surprised by the auditor general’s findings that Parliament was kept in the dark over the real costs of this program and what looks to be a $10-billion overrun.

Many seem to assume that misleading and denying whenever it suits is a government’s normal default position. After all, this government seems to have done it for years on Afghanistan and with its other problems in national defence.

In my own attempts to unravel the F-35′s real costs I never once met a single soul outside government and knowledgeable about defence purchases who believed the prime minister’s promise that the planes could be delivered for a bargain-rate $75 million each.

[...]]]>http://freemasonrywatch.org/blog/?feed=rss2&p=3120There are so many Masonic layers of misconduct in the F-35 affair that it is difficult to know where to starthttp://freemasonrywatch.org/blog/?p=310
http://freemasonrywatch.org/blog/?p=310#respondThu, 27 Dec 2012 05:17:24 +0000http://freemasonrywatch.org/blog/?p=310

There are so many layers of misconduct in the F-35 affair that it is difficult to know where to start. Do we especially deplore the rigging of operational requirements by defence officials to justify a decision that had already been made? Or should we focus on the government’s decision to buy the planes without even seeing the department’s handiwork? Is the scandal that the department deliberatedly understated the cost of the jets, in presentations to Parliament and the public? Or is it that its own internal figures, though they exceeded the published amounts by some $10-billon, were themselves, according to the Auditor General, gross underestimates?

It’s all of those things, of course, and more: a fiasco from top to bottom, combining lapses of professional ethics, ministerial responsibility and democratic accountability into one spectacular illustration of how completely our system of government has gone to hell.

This was, until last year’s shipbuilding contract, the largest single purchase in the [...]]]>

Phone-hacking scandal likely marks end of media baron’s control of British politics Doug Saunders – London

For decades, the tabloid newspapers of Britain have determined the political fates of governments left and right and held politicians hostage by threatening to expose their personal lives. It is an awkward and needy relationship, probably the last of its kind in the Western world, that seemed to come crashing to a halt as the House of Commons turned for the first time against the country’s most powerful media mogul.

It was as if a generation of political shame and anxiety exploded in a great catharsis of outrage and vengeance, with MP after MP rising on Wednesday to denounce magnate Rupert Murdoch and his control over their destinies. Tory MP Zac Goldsmith said that the Australian media baron “has systematically corrupted the police and in my view has gelded this Parliament, to our shame.”

It began as an emergency debate, called by the opposition Labour Party after it was revealed this week that the News of the World, a Sunday tabloid, had repeatedly broken into the mobile phone voicemail accounts of a [...]]]>

A good many people across the political spectrum—including some members of the Obama administration—are pressuring the president to intervene militarily in Libya. Much of the commentary has focused on establishing a no-fly zone, but there have been calls as well for enforcing a no-drive zone, or for arming or otherwise assisting regime opponents.

Those making this case appeal to a mixture of morality and realpolitik. They argue that by intervening we will prevent the slaughter of innocents and at the same time demonstrate our willingness to make good on expressions of support for freedom and security.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has taken the opposite position. Testifying before Congress last week, Mr. Gates pointed out that the first step in establishing a no-fly zone that would ground Libyan aircraft and helicopters would be to suppress Libyan air defenses that could threaten U.S. or allied aircraft. This would entail attacking selected targets. In other words, to establish a no-fly zone would be to go to [...]]]>

The Arab world’s revolutions have exposed the moral bankruptcy of France’s foreign policy.

BY ERIC PAPE | FEBRUARY 25, 2011

COMMENTS (14) Masonic Gestures: Hand on Shoulder, Hand in Jacket Breast The year in French foreign policy began rather well, with a feeling of a fresh start as the new minister of foreign affairs, Michèle Alliot-Marie, returned home rejuvenated from her Christmas holiday to provide renewed strength and focus at the Quai d’Orsay, the home of the ministry. As it turned out, neither her return, nor the vacation itself were such a great idea.

Two months into 2011, the transformation of North Africa has exposed a slew of moral failings in French policy in the Arab world, and raised a flurry of questions about Alliot-Marie’s ethics, judgment, and veracity. By Feb. 27, Alliot-Marie was gone, replaced in a cabinet reshuffle after less than four months in office. The rest of the French diplomatic corps is increasingly turning on the president as his Middle East policy continues to disintegrate.

…

Sarkozy, in a mea culpa of sorts, recently explained that France did not take “full measure of the hopelessness” [...]]]>